Making and Unmaking “places”

  • Carol Bacchi
  • Susan Goodwin


The challenge in this chapter is to rethink commonly assumed geographical “entities” or “places”. Such “entities” play a pivotal role in how governing takes place and are most often treated by policy makers as taken-for-granted physical sites or locations. The chapter shows how poststructural policy analysis, illustrated in applications of WPR, encourages policy workers/analysts to consider “places” as political creations. Specifically, it illustrates how, through the lens of problematization and a focus on practices, it becomes possible to interrogate the underlying precepts and assumptions that are necessary to the constitution of named “places”. The following questions guide the account: What does it mean to challenge the existence of “places” as fixed and stable “entities”? What is accomplished through this form of analysis? What strategies are available to problematize named “places”? What are the implications of a poststructural perspective for research on assumed “places”, such as “nation-states”, “cities”, and “public places”?


“the state” “Europe” “urban/rural” “developed/developing” “public places” 


  1. Ashley, R.K. (1988). Untying the sovereign state: A double reading of the anarchy problematique. Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 17 (2), 227–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bacchi, C. (1996). The politics of affirmative action: “Women”, equality and category politics. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  3. Bacchi, C. (2009). Analysing policy: What’s the problem represented to be? Frenchs Forest: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
  4. Bacchi, C., & Rönnblom, M. (2014). Feminist discursive institutionalism—A poststructural alternative. NORA – Nordic Journal of Feminist and Gender Research, DOI:  10.1080/08038740.2013.864701.Google Scholar
  5. Calvo, D. (2013). What is the problem of gender? Mainstreaming gender in migration and development in the European Union, PhD Thesis, Department of Sociology and Work Science, University of Gothenburg.Google Scholar
  6. Casey, R., Goudie, R., Reeve, K. (2007). Resistance and identity: Homeless women’s use of public spaces. People, Place & Policy Online, 1 (2), 90–97. DOI:  10.3351/ppp.0001.0002.0005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cort, P. (2008). VET policy formation and discourse in the EU: A mobile work force for a European labour market. In C.H. Jørgensen, & V. Aarkrog (Eds.), Divergence and convergence in education and work: Studies in vocational and continuing education. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  8. Council of the European Union (1999). Schengen acquis, 1999/435/EC and 1999/436/EC.Google Scholar
  9. Doel, M. (2000). Un-glunking geography: Spatial science after Dr Seuss and Gilles Deleuze. In M. Crang, & N. Thrift (Eds.), Thinking space. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. Doherty, J., Busch-Geertsema, V., Karpuskiene, V., Korhonen, J., O’Sullivan, E., Sahlin, I., Tosse, A., Petrillo, A., Wygna, J. (2008). Homelessness and exclusion: Regulating public space in European cities. Surveillance & Society, 5 (3), 290–314.Google Scholar
  11. Escobar, A. (2011). Encountering development: The making and unmaking of the third world. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Fenna, A. (2004). Australian public policy, 2nd edition. Frenchs Forest: Pearson Education Australia.Google Scholar
  13. Fernandez, B. (2012). Transformative policy for poor women: A new feminist framework. Surrey: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  14. Finlayson, A., & Martin, J. (2006). Poststructructuralism. In C. Hay, M. Lister, D. Marsh (Eds.), The state, theories and issues. Basingstoke: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  15. Foucault, M. (1991c) [1978]. Governmentality. In G. Burchell, C. Gordon, P. Miller (Eds.), The Foucault effect: Studies in governmentality. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  16. Foucault, M. (1994a) [1981]. So is it important to think? In J.D. Faubion, (Ed.), Power: Essential works of Foucault 1954–1984, vol. 3, Hurley, R. and others (trans.). London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  17. Foucault, M. (2000) [1982]. The subject and power. In J.D. Faubion (Ed.), Power: Essential works of Foucault 1954–1984, vol. 3, Hurley, R. and others (trans.). New York: The New Press.Google Scholar
  18. Goodwin, S. (2011). Analysing policy as discourse: Methodological advances in policy analysis. In L. Markauskaite, P. Freebody, J. Irwin (Eds.), Methodological choice and design: Scholarship, policy and practice in social and educational research. London, New York: Springer, Dordrecht, Heidelberg.Google Scholar
  19. Gordon, C. (1991). Governmental rationality: An introduction. In G. Burchell, C. Gordon, P. Miller (Eds.), The Foucault effect: Studies in governmentality. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  20. Government of South Australia (2012). Primary industries and regions South Australia (PIRSA) Strategic Directions 2012–2015. Adelaide: Government of South Australia.Google Scholar
  21. Gugerli, D. (1998). Politics on the topographer’s table: The Helvetic triangulation of cartography, politics, and representation. In T. Lenoir (Ed.), Inscribing science: Scientific texts and the materiality of communication. California: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Hindess, B. (2000). Citizenship in the international management of populations. American Behavioral Scientist, 43 (9), 1486–1497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Holmgren, S. (2015). Governing forests in a changing climate: Exploring patterns of thought at the climate change-forest policy intersection, PhD Thesis, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala.Google Scholar
  24. Holmgren, S., & Arora-Jonsson, S. (2015). The Forest Kingdom – with what values for the world? Climate change and gender equality in a contested forest policy context, Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 30 (3), 235–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kelly, S.J. (2015). Governing civil society: How literacy, education and security were brought together, PhD thesis, Faculty of Education, Queensland University of Technology.Google Scholar
  26. Kuehls, T. (1996). Beyond sovereign territory: The space of ecopolitics. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  27. MacLeod, G., & Jones, M. (2011). Renewing urban politics. Urban Studies, 48 (12), 2443–2472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Marshall, N. (2012a). Disability, inclusive development and the World Bank: The construction and problematisation of disability in international development policy, PhD thesis, Faculty of Social Sciences and Law, University of Bristol.Google Scholar
  29. Massey, D. (1994). Space, place and gender. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  30. Massey, D. (2005). For space. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  31. McDowell, M.G., & Wonders, N.A. (2009–2010). Keeping migrants in their place: Technologies of control and racialized public space in Arizona. Social Justice, 36 (2), 54–72.Google Scholar
  32. Middendorp, C. (2002). Homelessness and public space: Unwelcome visitors. Parity, 15 (1), 18.Google Scholar
  33. Mol, A. (2002). The body multiple: Ontology in medical practice. Durham and London: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Mouffe, C. (2005). On the political. London and New York: Verso.Google Scholar
  35. Northern Territory of Australia (2014). Northern Territory Second Reading Speeches, Police Administration Amendment Bill 2014, Accessed 2 January 2016.
  36. Papatsiba, V. (2014). Policy goals of European integration and competitiveness in academic collaborations: An examination of Joint Master’s and Erasmus Mundus Programmes. Higher Education Policy, 27 (1), 43–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Partridge, E. (2014). Words and silences: The discursive politics of problem representation in the Northern Territory Intervention, PhD thesis, University of New South Wales, Sydney.Google Scholar
  38. Pringle, R., & Watson, S. (1992). “Women’s interests” and the post-structuralist state. In M. Barrett, & A. Phillips (Eds.), Destabilizing theory: Contemporary feminist debates. California: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Razack, S. (2002). Race, space, and the law: Unmapping a white settler society. Toronto: Between the Lines Press.Google Scholar
  40. Rönnblom, M., & Sandberg, L. (2015). Imagining the ideal city, planning the gender-equal city, Paper presented at the RC21 International Conference on “The Ideal City: between myth and reality”, Urbino (Italy), 27–29 August, Accessed 20 November 2014.
  41. Sandberg, L., & Rönnblom, M. (2014). “I don’t think we’ll ever be finished with this”: Fear and safety in policy and practice. Urban Studies, 1–16. DOI:  10.1177/0042098014550453.Google Scholar
  42. Shapiro, M.J. (1992). Reading the postmodern polity: Political theory as textual practice. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  43. Tietäväinen, A., Pyykkönene, M., Kaisto, J. (2008). Globalization and power – governmentalization of Europe? An interview with William Walters. Foucault Studies, 5, 63–73.Google Scholar
  44. van Houtum, H. (2005). The geopolitics of borders and boundaries. Geopolitics, 10, 672–679.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Vasagar, J. (2012). Privately owned public space: Where are they and who owns them? The Guardian, London.Google Scholar
  46. Veyne, P. (1997). Foucault revolutionizes history. In A.I. Davidson (Ed.), Foucault and his Interlocutors, Porter, C. (trans.), Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  47. VLRC (Victorian Law Reform Commission) (2010). Surveillance in public places, Final Report 18. Melbourne: Victorian Law Reform Commission.Google Scholar
  48. Walker, R.B.J. (1993). Inside/outside: International relations as political theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  49. Walters, W. (2002a). The power of inscription: Beyond social construction and deconstruction in European integration studies. Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 31 (3), 83–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Walters, W. (2002b). Mapping Schengenland: Denaturalizing the border. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 20, 561–580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Walters, W. (2004). Secure borders, safe haven, domopolitics. Citizenship Studies, 8, 237–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Walters, W. (2009). Europe’s borders. In C. Rumford (Ed.), The Sage handbook of European Studies. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  53. Wilson, D., Rose, J., Colvin, E. (2010). Marginalised young people, surveillance & public space: A research report. Melbourne: Youth Affairs Council of Victoria and the School of Political and Social Inquiry, Monash University.Google Scholar
  54. Wiseman, N. (2012). “Food” for thought: A post-structural analysis of “food” and the implications for agriculture in urban and peri-urban regions, Masters of Planning Dissertation, Geography, Environment and Population, School of Social Sciences, University of Adelaide.Google Scholar
  55. Zufferey, C. (2014). Questioning representations of homelessness in the Australian print media. Australian Social Work, 67 (4), 525–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carol Bacchi
    • 1
  • Susan Goodwin
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of PoliticsUniversity of AdelaideAdelaideAustralia
  2. 2.Faculty of Education and Social WorkUniversity of SydneySydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations